4.4 Article

Use of the Soft-agar Overlay Technique to Screen for Bacterially Produced Inhibitory Compounds

期刊

出版社

JOURNAL OF VISUALIZED EXPERIMENTS
DOI: 10.3791/55064

关键词

Infection; Issue 119; bacteria; bacteriophage; bacteriocin; tailocin; antimicrobial agent; bacterial antagonism; PEG precipitation

资金

  1. Agriculture and Food Research Initiative competitive grant from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture [2015-67012-22773]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The soft-agar overlay technique was originally developed over 70 years ago and has been widely used in several areas of microbiological research, including work with bacteriophages and bacteriocins, proteinaceous antibacterial agents. This approach is relatively inexpensive, with minimal resource requirements. This technique consists of spotting supernatant from a donor strain (potentially harboring a toxic compound(s)) onto a solidified soft agar overlay that is seeded with a bacterial test strain (potentially sensitive to the toxic compound(s)). We utilized this technique to screen a library of Pseudomonas syringae strains for intraspecific killing. By combining this approach with a precipitation step and targeted gene deletions, multiple toxic compounds produced by the same strain can be differentiated. The two antagonistic agents commonly recovered using this technique are bacteriophages and bacteriocins. These two agents can be differentiated using two simple additional tests. Performing a serial dilution on a supernatant containing bacteriophage will result in individual plaques becoming less in number with greater dilution, whereas serial dilution of a supernatant containing bacteriocin will result a clearing zone that becomes uniformly more turbid with greater dilution. Additionally, a bacteriophage will produce a clearing zone when spotted onto a fresh soft agar overlay seeded with the same strain, whereas a bacteriocin will not produce a clearing zone when transferred to a fresh soft agar lawn, owing to the dilution of the bacteriocin.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据